His Honour Mr Justice Supperstone has ruled that there is no statutory basis in the Police [Injury Benefit] Regulations to support a different approach to a Regulation 37 review at different ages.
Use the link to view the full judgement.
Court decision confirms guidance contained in Home Office circular 46/2004 is not in accordance with the regulations.
The recent decision of His Honour Judge Behrens, sitting in the High Court confirms at Para 32 that:
“In my view the test proposed in the Guidance is not in accordance with regulation 37. The SMP is not entitled to conclude that “in the absence of cogent reason” the pensioner’s uninjured earning capacity is reduced to zero when he attains the age of 65. Rather, if the Police Authority refers the matter to him for review when the pensioner attains the age of 65 he must carry out a proper review in accordance with regulation 37. Thus he must consider whether the degree of the pensioner’s disablement has altered and if so whether the alteration is substantial.”
Any member who has had his/her Injury Pension reduced in this manner in accordance with the contents of HOC 46/2004 is now strongly urged to write to their Police Authority and Pension Administrators and seek a reinstatement of their Injury Pension to its previous banding from the date it was so unlawfully reduced. This decision has now been re-inforced by the case of Simpson heard on 21st February 2012 full details will follow when available.
Use the link to view the Home Office letter written to Police Pension Administrators, as a result of the Simpson case, pointing out that the process suggested for reviews of those aged 65 years is unlawful:
Use the links for our template letters to the police authority:
- NARPO letter template (1) address to Police Authority re_ Injury Award
- NARPO letter template (2) address to Police Authority re_ Injury Award
Use the link below for the full judgement: